Bug 1058732

Summary: [RFE] Allow live storage migration from block domain to a file domain
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager Reporter: Tal Nisan <tnisan>
Component: vdsmAssignee: Nir Soffer <nsoffer>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Kevin Alon Goldblatt <kgoldbla>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 3.4.0CC: acanan, amureini, bazulay, eedri, fsimonce, gklein, iheim, jwang, lpeer, nsoffer, scohen, tnisan, yeylon
Target Milestone: ovirt-3.6.0-rcKeywords: FutureFeature
Target Release: 3.6.0Flags: sherold: Triaged+
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: ovirt-engine-3.6.0_alpha2 Doc Type: Enhancement
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-03-09 19:20:37 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: Storage RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1058757, 1185842    

Description Tal Nisan 2014-01-28 12:53:58 UTC
Currently live migrating from a block domain to a file domain is impossible cause of a caching bug in VDSM

Comment 2 Ayal Baron 2014-02-10 14:26:36 UTC
*** Bug 961641 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 4 Dayle Parker 2016-02-22 01:07:39 UTC
If this bug requires doc text for errata release, please provide draft text in the doc text field in the following format:

 Cause:
 Consequence:
 Fix:
 Result:

The documentation team will review, edit, and approve the text.
If this bug does not require doc text, please set the 'requires_doc_text' flag to -.

Comment 5 Nir Soffer 2016-02-29 12:49:04 UTC
This bug does not need doc text, since the doc text is covered in bug 1058732.

Comment 6 Dayle Parker 2016-02-29 23:58:45 UTC
Hi Nir, 
Thanks for the reply. Just to double check, I'm guessing that you meant bug 1058757 instead of bug 1058732 -- is that correct?

Comment 7 Nir Soffer 2016-03-01 05:57:07 UTC
(In reply to Dayle Parker from comment #6)
> Just to double check, I'm guessing that you meant bug
> 1058757 instead of bug 1058732 -- is that correct?
Yes

Comment 9 errata-xmlrpc 2016-03-09 19:20:37 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2016-0362.html